Shocker: Dem lobbyists not rushing to fill coffers of Obama super-PAC

posted at 12:10 pm on February 28, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

To be fair, Barack Obama did promise during the 2008 campaign to make lobbyists into pariahs in Washington DC.  His campaign still refuses to accept direct contributions from lobbying shops, even if his promise to never hire lobbyists ended up producing dozens of waivers, and even if his stimulus bill could have been described as the Lobbyist Full Employment Act.  Now that Obama has deigned to allow lobbyists to donate to his super-PAC, they must be rushing to fill its coffers … right?  Right?

Wrong:

Democratic lobbyists who have been barred from fundraising for President Obama’s campaign are showing little interest in donating instead to a super-PAC that supports him.

Unlike Obama’s official campaign, the Priorities USA Action super-PAC accepts donations from registered lobbyists. The president gave his blessing to Priorities earlier this month, giving K Street a place to contribute cash to his reelection efforts.

Except it turns out that K Street wasn’t looking for a back door to fund Obama’s re-election effort:

“Did a great ‘huzzah’ go up among lobbyists when it was apparent that although we can’t give to the Obama reelect directly, we can [give] to the super-PAC that shares that goal? No,” said Robert Raben, the president and founder of the Raben Group and a former aide to Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).

Even the well-connected Tony Podesta, who recognizes just how good Obama has been for lobbyist business, is taking a pass for now:

Tony Podesta, the chairman of the Podesta Group and one of the Democratic Party’s biggest fundraisers, said he has no plans to fundraise or contribute to the pro-Obama super-PAC.

“I may well give to them, but the fact the president now wants me to doesn’t incent me further,” he said.

So now it can be said that Obama was against lobbyists before he was for them.  They’re not buying Obama’s re-election bid either way.  But don’t fret too much for the President — at least Obama always has … Bill Maher.

Tags: , , ,

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

If government is going to be arbiter of fair and lawful competition, long as RICO, monopoly, and other LARGE laws aren’t being violated, then government is WAY too large.

Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:44 PM

The real question, of course, is why DC — and other cities like it — even have so much innovation- and freedom-crushing red tape

How else are the bureaucrats going to keep the bribe money coming?

malclave on May 21, 2013 at 8:48 PM

How else are the bureaucrats going to keep the bribe money coming?

malclave on May 21, 2013 at 8:48 PM

That pretty much covers the topic.

Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:53 PM

How do you pronounce this: womp

Whoomp (as in Whoomp, there it is)? Wahmp (rhymes with pomp)? something else?

cptacek on May 21, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Uber is a FANTASTIC company… naturally, it and the innovation it represents would be antithetical to the current oppressive environment this crony-based government has spawned…

dpduq on May 21, 2013 at 9:03 PM

simply provide customers with the option of hailing a taxi with a smartphone app is being put through the ringer in the nation’s capitol, too.

I hate to throw the grammar Nazi flag, but the word I bolded above should be wringer.

Gator Country on May 21, 2013 at 9:13 PM

How do you pronounce this: womp

Whoomp (as in Whoomp, there it is)? Wahmp (rhymes with pomp)? something else?

cptacek on May 21, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Woah! Erika’s quite the womp rat!

KS Rex on May 21, 2013 at 9:44 PM

Wringer is a ringer for “ringer”

Now if you’ll excuse, I have clothes to dry.

wolly4321 on May 21, 2013 at 9:45 PM

The real question, of course, is why DC — and other cities like it — even have so much innovation- and freedom-crushing red tape

And then those cities wonder out loud why they continually suffer ‘brain drains’ when the best and brightest flee for greener pastures.

It’s not rocket surgery.

Myron Falwell on May 21, 2013 at 9:56 PM

The real question, of course, is why DC — and other cities like it — even have so much innovation- and freedom-crushing red tape that diverts so much of what could otherwise be everybody’s profitable time and resources into fighting for permission to operate and completely legitimate and highly efficient business that creates real jobs and improves people’s lives. You’d think that small businesses daring to threaten the established order were doing something illicit, what with all the hoops they have to jump through these days — and that is no way to grow any kind of economy, be it on a micro- or macro-level.

Just like the medieval guilds, the purpose is to protect the existing businesses from aggressive competition.

And yes, this undermines the whole free enterprise system. Fortunately, the startups just view it as one more obstacle to get past, and manage anyway. But it’s still a waste of time and money.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 22, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Had the opportunity to use Uber’s sedan service in L.A. a few weeks ago.

As soon as the service was ordered I knew that my car was 4 minutes away. I watched on the screen as it got closer and closer. When it hit 1 minute, I saw a black sedan on the opposite side of the street signaling to make a u-turn.

Contrast this with a year earlier when I called for a taxi in order to make the exact same trip. I was told that they were busy but they’d have someone there in 10 minutes. 15 minutes later I called and was told that someone would be there in 10 minutes. Another 15 minutes later I called and was told dispatch had sent someone and if they weren’t there in 5 minutes I should give them another call. 10 minutes after that I flagged down a passing cab and they got my business instead.

The Uber sedan service was $90 with tip. The taxi was $110 with tip.

If Uber wants to extend their business into the taxi realm (and they plan to keep the same level of service), it’s nothing but a boon to the residents of the cities they are operating in.

JadeNYU on May 22, 2013 at 11:02 AM

But Uber argues that the the taxi regulations issued last week, which go into effect June 1, would require it to link its payment system to the payment providers integrated into the new meters that taxis will begin installing this summer.

Wonder how much the preferred payment providers are paying DC?

unclesmrgol on May 22, 2013 at 11:43 AM